Allahabad High Court
Rakesh Pal Singh And 3 Ors vs State Of U.P. And Anr on 3 December, 2019
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 81 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 43717 of 2019 Applicant :- Rakesh Pal Singh And 3 Ors Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr Counsel for Applicant :- Amrit Shanker Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.
Heard Sri Amrit Shanker Dubey, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri G.P. Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking the quashing of entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 3367 of 2018 as well as impugned charge sheet dated 28.12.2016 and cognizance order dated 22.10.2018 arising out of case crime no. 189 of 2016, under Sections 323, 504 and 506 IPC, P.S. Nakhri, District Firozabad.
Learned counsel for the applicants has argued that accused-applicants are neighbour of the opposite party no. 2. A dispute had occurred between them because of flow of water of drain. Applicants have been falsely implicated. No such mar-peet has taken place as mentioned in the NCR. Charge sheet has been submitted by the investigating officer without proper investigation. He further submitted that if the proceedings are allowed to continue that would amount to abuse of process of law.
The learned AGA has vehementally opposed the prayer for quashing the proceedings.
I have gone through the N.C.R.., As per NCR, the incident happened on 25.9.2016 at 9:30 am when it is stated that the applicants had beaten up the opposite party no. 2 with hands and fists when opposite party no. 2 resisted.
Charge sheet has been submitted by the investigating officer after investigation in this case. It cannot be denied that cognizable offence is made out against the accused-applicant.
From the perusal of material on record and looking into the facts of this case, at this stage, it cannot be said that no cognizable offence is made out against the applicant. All the submissions made at the Bar relates to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court in proceedings u/s 482 Cr.P.C. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in cases of R. P. Kapur vs. The State Of Punjab, AIR 1960 SC 866, State of Haryana and others Vs. Ch. Bhajan Lal and others, AIR 1992 SC 604, State of Bihar and Anr. Vs. P.P. Sharma, AIR 1991 SC 1260 lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. and Ors. Vs. Md. Sharaful Haque and Ors., AIR 2005 SC 9. The disputed defense of the accused cannot be considered at this stage.
The prayer for quashing the proceedings is refused.
However, it is provided that if the applicants appear and surrender before the court below within 30 days from today and apply for bail, their prayer for bail may be considered and decided in view of the settled law laid by this Court in the case of Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 as well as judgement passed by Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P. For a period of 30 days from today or till the disposal of the application for grant of bail whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants. However, in case, the applicants do not appear before the Court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against them.
With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 3.12.2019 A.P. Pandey